yeah, but how many times have the skins benefitted from refs missing something. there were several times our defense got away with blatant pass interference during the game without being flagged. these things even themselves out.

The counter-argument would be that the standard needs to be that they are the best defense on the field every week, given the resources we have put in them. On Sunday, they were not the best defense on the field.

But, again, that's as much about a really good defensive gameplan from Dallas as anything. It was a well, well above average performance, even including the last drive. Of course, some would say that the difference between well above average and elite is the difference between a winner and a loser.

I kept thinking this all day watching the game, Dallas did a great job defensively. But then in the same sentence they didnt have much to go up against. Our offense is/was horrific and we still should have won that game.One thing I do know, our pass defense was the best on the field all day long. If our offense wasnt in the bottom 3 in the league we would probably be .500. I go back to what the guys on the field say London Fletch and Jerry Gray, you hold a team to 7 points on the road, you should beat that team everytime.

__________________ “Nobody’s going to be handed a job; not my standpoint, and I know Jay feels that way and I know Bruce feels the same way. You have to earn it. That’s what the NFL is about. Prove to me that you deserve to be on the field,’ and that’s the way it has to be in the NFL.”- McC

In the 4th quarter when the team MUST HAVE a defensive stand (three-and-out or a turnover to get the ball back) what the team gets is a drive by the opposition resulting in a score.

...What matters is making the defensive stop when the team absolutely, positively has to have one. And the Skins' defense the last couple of years simply has NOT done that.

Here is what I took out of SC's post, and it's absolutely true. It doesn't matter if the offense only puts up 6 points or if the defense holds up for 55 someodd minutes. The mentality of "bend don't break" can only hold up for so long. The defense let down when they needed to not bend at all, and that's what ultimately led to the final score.

You can argue that missed FGs and an inept offense lost the Skins the game, and I can agree with that, but I can also agree with the defense stopping the Cowboys all day until it mattered most. It's a combination of these things.

Good football teams find ways to win. Bad football teams find ways to lose.

^We only had 6 points. Blame the D, don't blame the D but in the end it's very difficult to shut out a team. I guess we were just hoping Dallas which has proven to be able to score more then 21 points in a game would only score 3 and we would win. Not good sound thinking. The defense did it's part all game. Whether that series was at the beginning of the game or the end one has to believe the opponant will score more then 6 points.

You're absolutley right, refs missed more than a few at that game. The NFL ruled that the review of whether or not Campbell stepped out bounds before tossing the ball to avoid a sack was NOT reviewable and that review should have never taken place. Anthony Spencer should have been awarded a sack on that play since it was not reviewable.

You're absolutley right, refs missed more than a few at that game. The NFL ruled that the review of whether or not Campbell stepped out bounds before tossing the ball to avoid a sack was NOT reviewable and that review should have never taken place. Anthony Spencer should have been awarded a sack on that play since it was not reviewable.

Why would Spencer be awarded a sack if Campbell ran out of bounds and threw the ball after he stepped out? Running out of bounds to avoid a sack doesn't give the pursuing player a sack. And what he did after he stepped out doesn't matter.

You're absolutley right, refs missed more than a few at that game. The NFL ruled that the review of whether or not Campbell stepped out bounds before tossing the ball to avoid a sack was NOT reviewable and that review should have never taken place. Anthony Spencer should have been awarded a sack on that play since it was not reviewable.

When did the NFL rule that. The broadcast crew said that they had received notification from the NFL referee guy that it was reviewable, and since no snap had taken place the right call was to overturn the ruling on the field, and remove the delay of game.

Good D or bad D, this defense has been unable to stop drives at critical junctures of games.
It is a tough call as to what is the case. YES, the O is.......BAAAAAADDDDD. However (and I heard it on Sunday) I heard Troy A remarking that this is the #1 D against the pass. Well......we are like 25th against the run. Who needs to pass? And we probably have more big plays scored on us than any other team? Way overrated.
AND who have we played that can throw the ball? Not many.
If I have to hang the loss on a unit...it's the O.
THIS D should be better. We should be able to shut down an opponent when necessary, regardless of what point in the game it comes. It makes little difference how well the D plays throughout a game if they cannot close it out?

Stats are often misleading. Our offense is horrible which makes the defense stay on the field for more plays. Yes, i would think our rush D would be better, but our pass defense? It's ranked high, but we've got an average secondary. The secondary helps out the run defense game alot and we haven't been very good there. LL and RD/CH...average. Rogers/Smoot/Hall...average.

i see where the OP is coming from. regardless of what our D did before the last 3 mins of the game, if they get a stop we might have been able to run the clock out or atleast give the ball back with under a min to go.

i also dont understand why we didnt blitz more given green bays success a week prior. andre carter said they had blitz plays ready they just never called them.

i see where the OP is coming from. regardless of what our D did before the last 3 mins of the game, if they get a stop we might have been able to run the clock out or atleast give the ball back with under a min to go.

i also dont understand why we didnt blitz more given green bays success a week prior. andre carter said they had blitz plays ready they just never called them.

How do your figure that their D was twice as good? We got into scoring postion 4 times and Dallas only twice. Once our D made a play causing a fumble and the 2nd we gave up a TD. If we scored when given the chance by their D we win and missed the chances.

Despite both our running and passing games working a lot of the time, they didn't give up any TDs, or really even let us all that close to the end zone. We let them in, and they really didn't have any sort of a passing game to work with all day long.

If our D ever played like that, I'd slurp them too. As it was, it was still a nice effort from the entire unit as a whole. You like to see that from time to time.

__________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

I have a feeling that if we had scored some more points then so would the Cowboys. Garrett called a very conservative game and when got desperate and really needed to score they did. The defense played very well but left plays on the field. Same old same old.

I have a feeling that if we had scored some more points then so would the Cowboys. Garrett called a very conservative game and when got desperate and really needed to score they did. The defense played very well but left plays on the field. Same old same old.

Jimmy Johnson said the same thing on the radio this morning.

__________________ A funny thing happened on the way to the temple. The moneychangers bought the priesthood.

I did not "blame the defense for not pitching a shutout". What I said was that the Skins led the game with about 6 minutes to play. The defense did not have to hold them outside field goal range; they had to prevent a TD.

They had done that - - and more - - all day long. But when it mattered most - - because if they failed the staggering offense would have precious little time to overcome the deficit - - the defense came up small.

The point for fanboys to look at is this:

The Skins' defense has done this about 5 or 6 times in the past two years. The coaches and the "Larry Michaels" of the world love to paint this as an elite defense. And for three quarters of a game they are usually well above average. But when it matters - - when it REALLY matters - - they OFTEN come up just small enough to lose the game.

Now if that isn't what happened on Sunday, I must have seen the wrong game. I'm not talking about what should have happened if the offense had scored more or what might have been if the moon were actually made of green cheese. I'm talking about what actually happened in the final six minutes of the Skins/Cowboys game on Sunday 11/22/2009.

As Dandy Don Merideth used to say on MNF back in the 70s:

"Were ifs and buts candy and nuts,
Oh, what a Christmas there'd be..."

__________________ The Sports Curmudgeon
www.sportscurmudgeon.com
But don't get me wrong, I love sports...